MINUTES OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Sixty-seventh Session
June 15, 1993
The Assembly Committee on Judiciary was called to order by Acting Chairman Bernie Anderson, at 8:08 a.m., on Tuesday, June 15, 1993, in Room 332 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Robert M. Sader, Chairman Absent/Excused
Mr. Gene T. Porter, Vice Chairman Absent/Excused
Mr. Bernie Anderson
Mr. John Bonaventura Absent
Mr. John C. Carpenter
Mr. Tom Collins, Jr.
Mr. James A. Gibbons
Mr. William D. Gregory
Mr. Ken Haller Absent/Excused
Mr. William A. Petrak
Mr. John B. Regan
Mr. Scott Scherer
Mr. Mike Schneider
Ms. Stephanie Smith
Mr. Louis A. Toomin
STAFF PRESENT:
Dennis Neilander, Legislative Counsel Bureau
OTHERS PRESENT:
Richard Harjo, Supervisory Forensic Specialist,
Lake's Crossing Center,
Bob Cavakis, Director of Youth Corrections
John Sarb, Administrator, Div. of Child and Family Services
Bill Bible, Chairman, State Gaming Control Board
Robert Barengo, Leroy's Race and Sports Book
Sharon Spangler, State of Nevada Employees' Association
Nancy Price, Private Citizen
Following roll call, Vice Chairman Anderson opened the hearing on SB 243 - First Reprint.
SENATE BILL 243 - FIRST REPRINT - Revises membership of gaming
policy committee.
Dennis Neilander, Legislative Counsel Bureau staff, explained SB 243 came out of the interim committee studying gaming, with SB 242, a companion bill, making the regulatory changes. This committee had been chaired by Senator Dina Titus, and Mr. Neilander said he had served as principal staff. Since the bill had been significantly amended on the Senate side, the only change the Assembly had to consider was the membership of the gaming policy committee from eight members to ten. He pointed out the two additions were delineated on lines 10 and 11 as being one member of a Nevada Indian tribe and a member of the gaming industry.
Mr. Neilander continued with an explanation of the effect of the bill. He pointed out the Governor had not met with the gaming policy committee since he had been in office; and the interim committee had suggested the committee should meet on a regular basis. However, over a period of time this proposal had been deleted from the bill, and currently, the committee would meet at the call of the Governor.
Mr. Gibbons expressed puzzlement why there was such a committee if it never met. Mr. Neilander said there had been times when the committee was very active, and the need for the committee was always based on the need for an ongoing policy dialogue composed of a broad-based membership. In response to Mr. Gibbons' question, Mr. Neilander said the committee had last met during the Bryan administration. Mr. Gibbons asked incredulously if policy matters had not been at issue over the past eight years. In response, Mr. Neilander said they probably had been, but the Gaming Commission shared the function of considering policy matters.
Mr. Gibbons asked if the members of the gaming policy committee were paid. Mr. Neilander said he did not believe so, however, it was possible they received per diem.
In response to Mr. Gibbons' question, Mr. Neilander said the committee was capable of making recommendations on policy matters but these recommendations were non-binding.
Mr. Petrak asked Mr. Neilander if the bill was created with the sole purpose of placing members of the Indian tribes on the committee. Mr. Neilander responded there were members of the interim study committee who supported the notion of representation from the Indian tribes on the policy committee because gaming policy did affect gaming which would take place on tribal lands as well as outside tribal lands. Discussion followed.
Bill Bible, Chairman of the State Gaming Control Board, explained the gaming policy committee had been statutorily created in 1961. During the 1970's, Governor O'Callaghan used the committee extensively for policy input to the Board and Commission relating to corporate gaming coming into the marketplace in Nevada, and for appropriate licensing procedure. He believed Governor List had met twice with the committee; and Governor Bryan had perhaps three meetings, one of which dealt with pari-mutuel wagering. Governor Miller, however, had relied upon the Board and the Commission for the formulation of policy.
Mr. Bible stated the bill, as it had come from the Senate, had his support. He did not believe mandated meetings with the Governor were suitable -- this should be left to the discretion of the Governor. Should he choose to call the committee together, it provided in the first version of the bill that the policy committee would become involved in negotiating compacts with the Indian nations. The Indians had expressed a preference to continue the existing practice of negotiating agreements with the state through the Gaming Board, the Gaming Commission and the Attorney General's Office.
In response to Mr. Anderson's request, Mr. Bible explained the functions of the Gaming Commission and the Gaming Board.
Mr. Toomin questioned how essential the gaming policy committee was to the Gaming Board. Mr. Bible responded it was not essential, but it was a convenience in terms of the statutory construction because it allowed the Governor to call this particular body together to discuss any policy issues which would potentially affect the state.
With no further testimony forthcoming on SB 243, the hearing was opened on AB 749.
ASSEMBLY BILL 749 - Prohibits wagering on certain amateur sporting events.
Nancy Price, appearing in her capacity as citizen and resident of North Las Vegas, said the bill was the result of testimony which had been given on AB 611. The bill simply placed in statute what was currently in gaming regulation 22.120, "Prohibited Wagers on In-state Amateur Sporting Events." The intent was to clarify the boundaries set in Nevada on student athletes, thus reducing, somewhat, the outside pressures athletes were exposed to in the billion-dollar sports entertainment business. It let students know athletics were not about gambling, but about sportsmanship, teamwork and personal achievement.
Mr. Anderson asked whether the bill would serve to preclude Nevada from hosting or taking part in amateur sports events. Mr. Bible agreed with Mrs. Price's remarks in that the bill would not allow a licensee to accept, through their sports betting operations, any wager on an amateur sporting event which took place in the state of Nevada. This included not only intercollegiate teams but also high school teams and other teams where there might be a possibility of wagering. Also, it would prohibit wagering or accepting wagers on any amateur sporting event which took place outside the state if the participant in the event was representing a public or private institution which was located in the state. By codifying a regulatory provision, Mr. Bible believed it clearly provided a different definition. He was ambivalent as to whether the legislation should be approved in terms of the codification.
Robert Barengo, representing Leroy's Race and Sports Book, explained "Leroy's" was a free-standing, independent loss book in Las Vegas, which operated sports book in 36 other locations across the state. He believed the regulation had worked very well with the Commission and the Board reviewing these matters; and if the bill passed, there would be instances when betting could not take place. He urged the committee to not pass AB 749.
Referring to the loss of gaming revenue if the bill was passed, Mrs. Price said there were studies indicating state-sanctioned gaming increased illegal gaming, and of course, it was well known there was a billion dollar industry in illegal gambling.
SENATE BILL 243 - FIRST REPRINT - Revises membership of gaming
policy committee.
ASSEMBLYMAN COLLINS MOVED TO DO PASS SB 243 - FIRST REPRINT.
ASSEMBLYMAN SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mr. Anderson told the committee Chairman Sader had indicated support of the bill and believed it would be a positive step to codify the regulation.
Ms. Smith believed sometimes principle had to supersede practicality and the principle of the gaming policy committee was good, thus, she believed the committee should pass the bill.
THE MOTION FAILED. (ASSEMBLYMEN GREGORY, PETRAK, REGAN, SCHNEIDER AND TOOMIN VOTED NO; ASSEMBLYMEN BONAVENTURA, HALLER, PORTER AND SADER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE; AND ALL OTHERS VOTED YES.)
ASSEMBLY BILL 689 - Makes various changes regarding placement of delinquent children and children in need of supervision.
Mr. Anderson told the committee Chairman Sader had indicated a letter from the Washoe judges indicated their support for the amended version of AB 689.
John Sarb, Administrator, Division of Child and Family Services, submitted Exhibit C, a set of amendments which had been devised in cooperation with Clark, Washoe and Douglas county officers. Mr. Sarb asked Bob Cavakis, Director of Youth Corrections to explain the amendments.
Mr. Cavakis pointed out the amendments proposed to AB 689 addressed those concerns expressed by several juvenile court judges and chief probation officers when the bill was first heard. The intent of the bill was to allow the Division the opportunity to make recommendations and to participate in dispositional hearings. These hearings dealt with children who were committed to the Division for delinquent acts and identified as being in need of placement in a correctional or institutional facility. The new language was, "and in need of special services."
Mr. Cavakis continued with a review of the proposed amendments.
Mr. Carpenter questioned Section 5.1.(a), dealing with a child less than 12 years of age. He asked Mr. Cavakis why younger children could not be housed in either Caliente or Elko. Mr. Cavakis said for the past four years current law banned them from placing children under 12 years in Caliente or Elko. This was due, primarily, to the educational program. If an eight-year-old was housed in Elko or Caliente, an educational program would have to be set up to deal with that child. The vast majority of the programs were aimed at the high school ages, with a few junior high programs. He said it was very difficult to program for youngsters under 12. When asked how many of these youngsters were being sent out of state now, Mr. Cavakis said three were sent out last year. As many as five had been sent out two years ago. Currently, he added, there was only one housed outside the state. It would probably take 20 youngsters (a full cottage) to justify the establishment of an educational program to fit the younger age group, he concluded.
Mr. Cavakis continued with the review of the proposed amendments. He pointed out Sections 13 and 16 would be repealed upon the expected passage of SB 542. This had to do with the manner in which the Division referred cases within the Division, and was unnecessary language.
Finally, Mr. Cavakis said they were proposing another amendment which would include the provisions stated in the last two pages of Exhibit C. This was a requirement for the Division to develop a plan for data collection. He said they recently underwent a "needs assessment" by the National Council of Crime and Delinquency which focused on projected future bed needs for delinquent youth, how the system was working, etc. The most negative comments had to do with the Division's inability to collect information and interpret this information. Mr. Anderson asked if this involved a fiscal note. Mr. Cavakis said, "No," it could be done through the normal course of business.
When questioned regarding the judges' agreement, Mr. Sarb pointed out the amendment in Section 5.1.(b) stating, "obtain the approval of" was specifically supported by Judge Gamble.
Mr. Anderson interjected that Chairman Sader had told him before the committee meeting he had received letters of support for the amended version of the bill from the Washoe County Judges and had tacit agreement from Clark County.
ASSEMBLYMAN REGAN MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS AB 689.
ASSEMBLYMAN PETRAK SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
Mr. Regan was asked to present the floor statement for AB 689.
SENATE BILL 89 - Confers powers of peace officers upon certain employees of mental hygiene and mental retardation division of department of human resources.
Mr. Anderson reminded the committee they had first heard SB 89 on April 9, 1993, and it would extend peace officer status to the forensic technicians at Lake's Crossing. If SB 89 was passed, Mr. Anderson said it would have to be brought into compliance with AB 575, a trailer bill dealing with peace officer status.
Richard Harjo, Supervisory Forensic Specialist, Lake's Crossing Center, made a correction to a reference which indicated the Lake's Crossing Center was under the Department of Prisons. He said Lake's Crossing Center was under the auspices of the Department of Mental Health/Mental Hygiene; and this was the crux of the problem. If they were within the Department of Prisons, the forensic specialists would have peace officer status.
Sharon Spangler, State of Nevada Employees' Association, affirmed the forensic specialists in the Department of Prisons were already covered by peace officer status. She said the Employees' Association did not object to the intent of the bill.
In response to Mr. Scherer's question, Mr. Harjo said there were no other forensic specialists within the Department of Mental Health/Mental Hygiene.
ASSEMBLYMAN COLLINS MOVED TO DO PASS SB 89.
ASSEMBLYMAN BONAVENTURA SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
Mr. Gibbons was asked to present the floor statement.
SENATE BILL 430 -Revises provisions governing entry or exit of vehicle on controlled-access highway and use of signals by emergency vehicles.
Mr. Scherer reviewed the bill, and proposed an amendment to the language on page 2, subsection 3. Mr. Scherer believed "flashing lights" should be added to the words, "a sufficient signal is given by using a siren or audible equipment." He suggested using the same language as that on page 1, lines 24 and 25; and explained the rationale for the addition.
ASSEMBLYMAN SCHERER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS SB 430.
ASSEMBLYMAN PETRAK SECONDED THE MOTION
THE MOTION CARRIED. (ASSEMBLYMAN SMITH VOTED NO, ALL OTHERS VOTED YES.)
Mr. Scherer was asked to handle the bill on the floor.
SENATE BILL 478 -Broadens basis for exercising jurisdiction over party in civil action.
ASSEMBLYMAN SMITH MOVED TO DO PASS SB 478.
ASSEMBLYMAN CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (ASSEMBLYMAN COLLINS VOTED NO, ALL OTHERS VOTED YES.)
Ms. Smith was asked to handle the floor statement.
SENATE BILL 413 -Makes various changes regarding civil actions.
Mr. Anderson noted the bill had several amendments proposed. He continued with a review of the progress, finally suggesting the bill be held for Chairman Sader's action.
SENATE BILL 152 - FIRST REPRINT - Requires owner to deliver
copy of recorded notice of completion to any person who submitted request for notice.
ASSEMBLYMAN SMITH MOVED TO DO PASS SB 152 - FIRST REPRINT.
ASSEMBLYMAN SCHERER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY THOSE PRESENT.
Mr. Porter was asked to handle the floor statement.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Iris Bellinger
Committee Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Judiciary
Date: June 15, 1993
Page: 1